Thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position

Recent advances in thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Technical advances and developments in endoscopic equipment and thoracoscopic surgery have increased the popularity of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, there is currently no established scientific evidence supporting the use of MIE as an alternative to open esophagectomy (OE). To date, a number of single-institution studies and several meta-analyses have demonstrated acceptable short-term outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, and we recently reported one of the largest propensity score-matched comparison studies between MIE and OE for esophageal cancer, based on a nationwide Japanese database. We found that, in general, MIE had a longer operative time and less blood loss than OE. Moreover, compared to OE, MIE was associated with a lower rate of pulmonary complications such as pneumonia, and both methods had similar mortality rates. Although MIE may reduce the occurrence of postoperative respiratory complications, MIE and OE seem to have comparable short-term outcomes. However, the oncological benefit to patients undergoing MIE remains to be scientifically proven, as no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to verify each method's impact on the long-term survival of cancer patients. An ongoing randomized phase III study (JCOG1409) is expected to determine the impact of each method with regard to short- and long-term outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Salvage Operations for Esophageal Cancer after Definitive Chemoradiotherapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Because salvage surgery after definitive chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer is associated with high postoperative mortality and morbidity, minimally invasive methods are desirable. We analyzed the validity of minimally invasive salvage operations (MISO).

METHODS

Twenty-five patients underwent salvage operation between 2010 and 2016 in our institution, 10 having undergone right transthoracic salvage esophagectomy (TTSE group), 6 transhiatal salvage esophagectomy (THSE), 6 salvage lymphadenectomy (SLA), and 3 salvage endoscopic submucosal dissection (SESD). Patients who had undergone THSE, SLA, or SESD were categorized as the MISO group. Short- and long-term outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

The mean duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the SLA groups than in the TTSE group (p = 0.0248). Blood loss was significantly less in the SLA than the TTSE group (p = 0.0340). Intensive care unit stay was shorter in the THSE than the TTSE group (p = 0.0412). There was no significant difference in postoperative mortality between the MISO and THSE groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SLA than the TTSE group (p = 0.0061). Patients' survivals did not differ significantly between the MISO and TTSE groups (p = 0.752). Multivariate analysis revealed that residual disease (R0; HR 4.872, 95% CI 1.387-17.110, p = 0.013) was the only independent factor influencing overall survival.

CONCLUSION

MISO is preferable because short-term outcomes are better and long-term outcomes do not differ from those of TTSE.

The prone position during surgery and its complications: a systematic review and evidence-based guidelines

Surgery in the prone position is often a necessity when access to posterior anatomic structures is required. However, many complications are known to be associated with this type of surgery, as physiologic changes occur with increased pressure to anterior structures. While several studies have discussed postoperative vision loss, much fewer studies with lower levels of evidence have addressed other complications. A systematic literature review was conducted using 2 different databases, and 53 papers were regarded as appropriate for inclusion. Qualitative and quantitative analysis was performed. Thirteen complications were identified. Postoperative vision loss and cardiovascular complications, including hypovolemia and cardiac arrest, had the most number of studies and highest level of evidence. Careful planning for optimal positioning, padding, timing, as well as increased vigilance are evidence-based recommendations where operative prone positioning is required.

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: Present and future directions

Laparoscopic surgery is applied today worldwide to most digestive procedures. In some of them, such as cholecystectomy, Nissen's fundoplication or obesity surgery, laparoscopy has become the standard in practice. In others, such as colon or gastric resection, the laparoscopic approach is frequently used and its usefulness is unquestionable. More complex procedures, such as esophageal, liver or pancreatic resections are, however, more infrequently performed, due to the high grade of skill necessary. As a result, there is less clinical evidence to support its implementation. In the recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied, again with little evidence for comparison with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This review will focus on the complex digestive procedures as well as those whose use in standard practice could be more controversial. Also novel robot-assisted procedures will be updated.

The effect of perioperative administration of glucocorticoids on pulmonary complications after transthoracic oesophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe pulmonary complications occur frequently following transthoracic oesophagectomy. An exaggerated immunological response is probably a main driving factor, and this might be prevented by perioperative administration of a glucocorticoid.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical benefits and harms of perioperative glucocorticoid during transthoracic oesophagectomy, using pulmonary complications as the primary outcome. Mortality, anastomotic leakage rate and infection were secondary outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of interventional trials with a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

The search retrieved seven RCTs and four interventional nonrandomised studies. In total, 367 patients received perioperative glucocorticoid and 415 patients did not. A meta-analysis of the RCTs showed no significant effect of glucocorticoid. For pulmonary complications, the pooled risk ratio was 0.69 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.79], for anastomotic leakage 0.61 (95% CI 0.23 to 1.61) and for infections 1.09 (95% CI 0.41 to 2.93). A subgroup analysis of RCTs that used weight-dependent dosing within 30 min preoperatively showed a pooled risk ratio of 0.28 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.77) for pulmonary complications compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis, perioperative administration of glucocorticoid did not affect the risk of pulmonary complications after transthoracic oesophagectomy, nor did it cause adverse effects. A subgroup analysis showed that a weight-dependent dose of methylprednisolone 10 to 30 mg kg within 30 min preoperatively might be the most promising dosing regimen for further research.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: Lateral decubitus vs. prone positioning; systematic review and pooled analysis

The uptake of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has increased vastly over the last decade, with proven short-term benefits over an open approach. The aim of this pooled analysis was to compare clinical outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) performed in the prone and lateral decubitus positions. A systematic literature search (2000-2015) was undertaken for publications that compared patients who underwent MIE in the lateral decubitus (LD) or prone (PR) positions. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for the effect size of LD positioning on continuous variables and Pooled odds ratios (POR) for discrete variables. Ten relevant publications comprising 723 patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy were included; 387 in the LD group and 336 in the PR group. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of in-hospital mortality, total morbidity, anastomotic leak, chylothorax, laryngeal nerve palsy, average operative time, and length hospital stay. LD MIE was associated with a non-significant increase in pulmonary complications (POR = 1.65; 95% C.I. 0.93 to 2.92; P = 0.09), and significant increases in estimated blood loss (WMD = 36.03; 95% 14.37 to 57.69; P = 0.001) and a reduced average mediastinal lymph node harvest (WMD = -2.17; 95% C.I. -3.82 to -0.52; P = 0.01) when compared to prone MIE. Pooled analysis suggests that prone MIE is superior to lateral decubitus MIE with reduced pulmonary complications, estimated blood loss and increased mediastinal lymph node harvest. Further studies are needed to explain performance-shaping factors and their influence on oncological clearance and short-term outcomes.

Minimally invasive resection of synchronous thoracic esophageal and gastric carcinomas followed by reconstruction: a case report

We report on a case of synchronous carcinomas of the esophagus and stomach. A 68-year-old man was referred to our hospital for an abnormality found during his medical examination. Further evaluation revealed squamous cell carcinoma in the thoracic lower esophagus and gastric adenocarcinoma located in the middle third of the stomach. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position (TSEP), laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with three-field lymph node dissection, and laparoscopically assisted colon reconstruction (LACR) were performed. The patient did not have any major postoperative complications. His pathological examination revealed no metastases in 56 harvested lymph nodes and no residual tumor. He was followed up for 30 months without recurrence. To our knowledge, this is the first report of esophageal and gastric synchronous carcinomas that were successfully treated with a combination of TSEP, LTG, and LACR. These operations may be a feasible and appropriate treatment for this disease.

Advantages of the prone position for minimally invasive esophagectomy in comparison to the left decubitus position: better oxygenation after minimally invasive esophagectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate whether minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the prone position has advantages over the left decubitus position.

METHOD

A total of 110 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who had undergone MIE were included in the analysis. The clinical outcomes were compared between 51 patients treated in the prone position (prone group) and 59 patients treated in the left decubitus position (LD group). The main outcome was postoperative respiratory complications and postoperative oxygenation [arterial oxygen pressure/fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F ratio)]. The secondary outcomes included the length of the operation, blood loss, number of dissected lymph nodes, postoperative morbidities and mortality.

RESULTS

The P/F ratio after the operation was significantly higher in the prone group (0 h: P = 0.01, 12 h: P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the frequency of respiratory complications (P = 0.89). The blood loss in the prone group was significantly lower (P < 0.001), and the number of dissected intrathoracic lymph nodes was significantly higher (P = 0.03) than in the LD group. No significant differences were observed in the frequencies of overall postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

MIE in the prone position preserves better oxygenation of patients during the early recovery period, and is associated with less blood loss and a larger number of dissected lymph nodes.

Minimally invasive surgery for oesophageal cancer

Worldwide an increasing part of oncologic oesophagectomies is performed in a minimally invasive way. Over the past decades multiple reports have addressed the perioperative outcomes and oncologic safety of minimally invasive oesophageal surgery. Although many of these (retrospective) case-control studies identified minimally invasive oesophagectomy as a safe alternative to open techniques, the clear benefit remained subject to debate. Recently, this controversy has partially resolved due to the results of the first randomized controlled trial that compared both techniques. In this trial short-term benefits of minimally invasive oesophagectomy were demonstrated in terms of lower incidence of pulmonary infections, shorter hospital stay and better postoperative quality of life. However, the current lack of long-term data on recurrence rate and overall survival precludes a comprehensive comparison of minimally invasive and open oesophagectomy. Proclaiming minimally invasive oesophagectomy as the standard of care for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer would therefore be a premature decision.

Modified McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a 5-year retrospective study of 142 patients in a single institution

Background

To achieve decreased invasiveness and lower morbidity, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) was introduced in 1997 for localized esophageal cancer. The combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy (left neck anastomosis, defined as the McKeown MIE procedure) has been performed since 2007 at our institution. From 2007 to 2011, our institution subsequently evolved as a high-volume MIE center in China. We aim to share our experience with MIE, and have evaluated the outcomes of 142 patients.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 142 consecutive patients who had presented with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown MIE from July 2007 to December 2011. The procedure, surgical outcomes, disease-free and overall survival of these cases were assessed.

Results

The average total procedure time was 270.5±28.1 min. The median operation time for thoracoscopy was 81.5±14.6 min and for laparoscopy was 63.8±9.1 min. The average blood loss associated with thoracoscopy was 123.8±39.2 ml, and for laparoscopic procedures was 49.9±14.3 ml. The median number of lymph nodes retrieved was 22.8. The 30 day mortality rate was 0.7%. Major surgical complications occurred in 24.6% and major non-surgical complications occurred in 18.3% of these patients. The median DFS and OS were 36.0±2.6 months and 43.0±3.4 months respectively.

Conclusions

Surgical and oncological outcomes following McKeown MIE for esophageal cancer were acceptable and comparable with those of open-McKeown esophagectomy. The procedure was both feasible and safe – properties that can be consolidated by experience.

Strategies to reduce pulmonary complications after esophagectomy

Esophagectomy, the surgical removal of all or part of the esophagus, is a surgical procedure that is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Pulmonary complications are an especially important postoperative problem. Therefore, many perioperative strategies to prevent pulmonary complications after esophagectomy have been investigated and introduced in daily clinical practice. Here, we review these strategies, including improvement of patient performance and technical advances such as minimally invasive surgery that have been implemented in recent years. Furthermore, interventions such as methylprednisolone, neutrophil elastase inhibitor and epidural analgesia, which have been shown to reduce pulmonary complications, are discussed. Benefits of the commonly applied routine nasogastric decompression, delay of oral intake and prophylactic mechanical ventilation are unclear, and many of these strategies are also evaluated here. Finally, we will discuss recent insights and new developments aimed to improve pulmonary outcomes after esophagectomy.

Current status of minimally invasive esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer

Technical advancements and development of endoscopic equipment in thoracoscopic surgery have resulted in increase in the popularity of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, advantages with regard to short-term outcome and oncological feasibility of MIE have not been adequately established. To date, a number of single-institution studies and several meta-analyses have demonstrated acceptable short-term outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, and the outcomes are comparable to those of conventional open esophagectomy (OE). A study group recently reported the results of the first multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compared MIE and OE. The incidence of pulmonary infection after surgery was markedly lower in the MIE group than in the OE group. Additional benefits of MIE included less operative blood loss, better postoperative patients' quality of life, and shorter hospital stay. However, the oncological benefit to patients undergoing MIE has not been scientifically proven because there have been no RCTs to verify the equivalency in long-term survival of patients undergoing MIE compared with that of patients undergoing OE. If future prospective studies indicate oncological benefits, MIE could truly become the standard care for patients with esophageal cancer.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has become an established approach for the treatment of esophageal carcinoma. In comparison with open esophagectomy MIE reduces blood loss, respiratory complications, and length of hospital stay. At the University of Pittsburgh, the authors now predominantly perform a laparoscopic-thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. This article details this technique, discusses the recently published series of more than 1000 esophagectomies performed by the authors during the last 15 years, and reviews the current literature on MIE.